Inflight Thrust Angle Testing

Getting in the Air
21

I’m launching at the midway red line which is recommend for launch in nil winds and higher elevation according to the manual. Plus, the wing doesn’t lag behind so much on launch in this trim setting. I’m only flying at this speed/trim for about 3-4 minutes and keep the climb power at 8 -10 kWh, the glide from 500’ to 30’ doesn’t take long since this glider sinks at about -2.5 m/s and only has a 5:1 glide ratio at best. LoL

I wasn’t sure if pilots are counting the motor on time or total flight time so I had been going off the LCD time.

1 Like
22

Sounds good. Yeah, higher sink rate also means you need more power to climb. Hopefully the newer wing is more efficient. It’s a full reflex wing though which is slightly less efficient. In another thread Paul recommended the Kona 2 for long flight times. I think it would be fun to demo that wing.

Another thing you can do if you want to milk more power out of the battery is use partial throttle during your descent. The voltage sag is less with lower amps so you can get closer to the cutoff limit. I only flew mine to cutout once. I think it was about 74 volts. I often go down to 76 under load and it doesn’t cut.

1 Like
23

I finally received the aviator Spyder 3 demo wing and put in a test flight yesterday morning. Here’s my thoughts and results of the flight.

9/5/23 SP 140 PPG flight #27 Jean dry lake bed 42 minutes morning, winds 0-2 very calm air (62F). This flight was done with the aviator demo wing Ozone Spyder 3 28m brand new wing. Launched in trimmers neutral (red line) very slight breeze forward launch which took about 14 steps on power to takeoff. The wing is slightly easier to launch than the original and was very stable with zero pitch movement with throttle off, the oscillations were few and small. The wing didn’t have any twisting, although it did feel like the wing allowed more motor torque than the original wing. The wing maintained level flight at 5.8 kWh draw and sink rate was 1.9 m/s compared to the original at 2.5 m/s. The off power glide was much better than the original Spyder and very stable in turns. The brake lines are too long and would need to be adjusted, landing in nil wind was fast. No use of the tip steering. Battery used 3.6 kWh @77v (10%) for 40 minutes of motor on time and 18% remaining (79.7v). The kWh average draw per minute = 0.09 compared to the original Spyder at 0.10 kWh draw. Which results in an overall 15% improvement over the original Spyder wing.

Ozone Spyder 3 demo wing flight 9/5/23

Pros:

Easier to launch in nil wind

Shorter takeoff than original Spyder

Wing doesn’t twist and oscillating is very small

Wing stays nicely inflated and stiff

Turns are very good and stable

Brake input is consistent and linear

Throttle off wing doesn’t dive as much as the original Spyder.

The glide ratio is improved, 1.9 m/s sink rate

Nice brake toggle magnets

The wing efficiency overall is 15% improved over the original Spyder.

Average speed is 24 mph compared to original Spyder at 23 mph.

Confidence inspiring wing, overall the wing made for a more relaxed and fun flight.

Cons:

$4500 price tag

The brake lines are too long

The landing speed is faster than the original Spyder

SP140 motor on flight time improved only by 5 minutes.

So jury is still out on wether or not to purchase a new wing for the SP, I’ll probably give the Niviuk Hook 5 PG wing another try with the new thrust angle to see if the kWh draw has improved. Review of my notes indicate that the PG wing was flying level at 5.1 kWh draw compared to Spyder original wing at the same thrust angle was 6.1 kWh. The new thrust angle improved the Spyder current draw to 5.9 kWh for level flight.

Happy flying all!

1 Like